Sioux City & St. Paul Railroad Co. v. Countryman
Decision Date | 01 June 1891 |
Citation | 49 N.W. 72,83 Iowa 172 |
Parties | SIOUX CITY & ST. PAUL RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. LEWIS COUNTRYMAN, Appellee. THE SAME v. ADAM PHILLIPS, Appellee. THE SAME v. BAZEL D. BATTIN, Appellee. v. WASHINGTON ROYER, Appellee |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeals from Woodbury District Court.--HON. GEORGE W WAKEFIELD, Judge.
EACH of these actions involves the title to a quarter section of land claimed by the plaintiff under a railroad grant, and by the defendant by virtue of an entry made under the laws of the United States. The plaintiff asks that the entries be vacated, that the defendants be enjoined from attempting to acquire title by virtue of their entries, and that the title of the plaintiff be quieted. Judgment was rendered in each case in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appeals. The questions in controversy are common to all the cases, and they are submitted together on one abstract.
Affirmed.
J. H. & C. M. Swan, for appellant.
M. B Davis, for appellees.
The claim of title made by the plaintiff is based upon the following: An act of congress, entitled "An act for a grant of lands to the state of Iowa, in alternate sections, to aid in the construction of a railroad in said state," approved May 12, 1861; chapter 134 of the Acts of the Eleventh General Assembly of the state of Iowa; an alleged compliance with the requirements of said acts; patents issued by the United States to the state of Iowa; and chapter 34 of the Private, Local and Temporary Acts of the Fifteenth General Assembly of Iowa. The defendants, Countryman and Phillips, claim title under homestead entries, made on the twelfth day of September, 1887; and the defendants, Royer and Battin, claim, by virtue of pre-emption, entries made on the same date. Those portions of the act of congress specified which we need to consider are as follows:
Chapter 134 of the Acts of the Eleventh General Assembly accepted the grant "upon the terms, conditions, and restrictions" contained in the act of congress. Section 2 conferred "so much of the lands, interests, rights, powers and privileges, as are or may be granted" in pursuance of the act of congress upon the plaintiff "for the purpose of aiding in the construction of a railroad from Sioux City, in the state of Iowa, to the south line of the state of Minnesota." Chapter 144 of the acts of the same general assembly also accepted the grant, and further provided as follows:
On the twentieth day of September, 1866, the plaintiff filed in the office of the secretary of the state of Iowa an acceptance of the grant, and in July, 1867, it filed in the same office and in the department of the interior a map showing the location of its proposed road. In August of that year the lands which were claimed to be included in the grant were withdrawn from market. Before the close of the year 1872 the plaintiff completed a railway from a point on the south line of the state of Minnesota to LeMars, a distance of fifty-six and one-fourth miles, and about two miles of main and side track in Sioux City. It has also built in the place last named a roundhouse, machine and car shops, and other buildings, of the value of one hundred thousand dollars, but has never constructed a road from LeMars to Sioux City. It operates trains between those places--a distance of twenty-four miles--over the track used by the Illinois Central Railway Company. The governor of this state duly certified the completion of five sections of ten miles each commencing at the south line of the state of Minnesota, as contemplated by the act of congress; and also certified to the completion of the road from the point of commencement to LeMars. Patents were issued by the United States to the state of Iowa for an aggregate four hundred and seven thousand, eight hundred and seventy and twenty-one-hundredths acres of land as inuring under the grant to the plaintiff, including the lands in controversy. The Fifteenth General Assembly, by chapter 34 of its private, local and temporary acts, directed the governor to certify to the plaintiff all lands which were then held by the state of Iowa in trust for its benefit in accordance with section 2 of chapter 134 of the Acts of the Eleventh General Assembly. Certificates have been issued to the plaintiff under that statute for three hundred and twenty-two thousand, four hundred and twelve and eighty-one-hundredths acres of land, but not for the land in controversy. Of the lands so certified a large quantity was claimed by the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company under a grant made by the same act of congress under which the plaintiff claims. In an action in the federal courts, in which said company was the plaintiff, and the plaintiff in these actions and others were defendants, it obtained a decree awarding to it forty-one thousand, six hundred and eighty-seven and fifty-two-hundredths acres of the lands which had been certified to the plaintiff. In the year 1882 the general assembly enacted a law to resume the lands which had been conferred upon the plaintiff under the act of congress of 1864, and which had not been earned. Two years later a law was enacted by the general assembly...
To continue reading
Request your trial